With Trump's refusal to accept any compromise that doesn't include money for his "wall," I'm reminded of James David Barber's classification of presidential character types in his book, Presidential Character: Predicting Performance in the White House. Barber notes that character is one of three components of personality. It develops first, usually from interactions with parents and siblings, and is the most stable component. He defines it as the way a president orients himself towards life.
There are two components of character: (1) activity level denotes how a president engages in the presidency, being either active or passive; (2) positive or negative depicts the reasons that a person seeks the presidency in the first place and how he/she defines the role. A positive character type seeks the presidency to do good things for the nation. A negative character type seeks the presidency to overcome his/her own self doubts, to compensate for people's lack of respect and proper acknowledgement of his/her accomplishments/potential.
Consequently, there are four character types: Active-Positive, Passive-Positive, Active-Negative, or Passive-Negative. Barber contends that the best character type for the presidency is the Active-Positive: The person is active, fully engaging in the politics of the presidency, and Positive, sought the presidency to do good things for the American people. The most dangerous character type is the Active-Negative: Though fully engaged in the politics of the presidency, the person sought the presidency for personal reasons (compensation for low self-esteem) and refuses to compromise with other politicians after he/she has decided on a course of action. The defining characteristic is an unwillingness to compromise because compromise is viewed as a sign of weakness--a rigidity that can be disastrous for the person's presidency, but more importantly, for the nation.
You saw where I was going with this, didn't you. The end will not be pretty.
Good point--Trump has his moments--Definitely Active. But I think he floats back and forth between Positive and Negative. I think he did seek the presidency for what he believed to be "doing good things for the American People." Obviously, what is viewed as "good things" is different for members of the opposing parties.
ReplyDeleteYet, all the other aspects of negative can also be seen--self-esteem issues, rigidity, etc. Of course, compromise is not exactly the political approach of congressional Democrat also--so the era of extreme political polarization--we may very well end up not in a "pretty place."